Skip to main content
. 2016 Oct 25;139(12):3092–3108. doi: 10.1093/brain/aww251

Figure 4.

Figure 4

SARM1 knockout preserves the tail action potential amplitude following vincristine treatment. (A) Depicted are representative tracings from one wild-type and one SARM1 knockout mouse before and after vincristine. Note the decreased tail amplitude after vincristine treatment in wild-type, but not SARM1 knockout mice. (B) The tail amplitude is not statistically significantly different between groups at baseline [one-way ANOVA, P = 0.1031, F(3,46) = 2.181; n = 10–15 per group]. (C) After vincristine, wild-type mice show a decreased tail amplitude [one-way ANOVA, P = 0.0091 F(3,46) = 4.325, **P < 0.01, Tukey’s post hoc; n = 10–15 per group], whereas the tail amplitude of vincristine-treated SARM1 knockout mice is not significantly different. (D) There was no change in conduction velocity in any of the groups [two-way ANOVA, there was no significant main effect between groups F(3,46) = 2.787, P = 0.0512 and between pre and post vincristine treatment F(1,46) = 0.9229, P = 0.3417; n = 10–15 per group]. KO = knockout.